The argument over why this ad won’t make it to the airwaves goes like this: Daniel Defense attempted to buy Super Bowl ad time in several local media markets in November. Most of the markets did not accept it and the response from one station in Little Rock, Ark., is still pending.

A Fox Station in their home state Atlanta, Ga., told Daniel Defense in an email, “Unfortunately we cannot accept your commercial spots in Football / Super Bowl due to the rules the NFL itself has set into place for your companies [sic] category.”

The NFL says that it never saw the ad and never heard of it before it blew up in conservative media circles last month.

The NFL’s Vice President for Communications Brian McCarthy told ABC News that the controversy is being ginned up by the company who was “looking to gain exposure for this ad.”

This policy has not set well with many people. The dismissive response of Mr. McCarthy to me is just as troubling. It speaks of a disdain for the firearms industry, those who work in it, and those of use who would patronize Daniel Defense.

Ginny Simone of NRA News has done a special report on the controversy. The report was released earlier this week.

Hey, they have a political position, it's antigun, and now the crapweasel doesn't have the manhood to stand behind his previous position.

The right answer to this? Why should the NFL have special exemptions to antitrust law, and a special tax subsidy that lets it call itself a nonprofit while taking, as they did with DD, a partisan political position? Let's cut McCarthy and the rest of the corporate welfare leeches at the NFL off the government subsidies their monopoly thrives on.

You have one congressman and two senators. Two of the three are probably up for election this year. Get writing!